“OK, so what’s wrong with this idea: all pay stops when the accused is indicted. If he is later found innocent, he gets all back pay plus interest.”
The problem is that constitutionally, it presumes guilt before an adjudication. Don’t get me wrong: in cases like this where there are dozens of witnesses to the offenses, the human side of me says, “just string him up”; however, as we hear ad nauseum: “We are a nation of laws, not of men.” Doing the right thing in the right way at the right time for the right reason is the foundation and responsibility of such a nation.
As you were.
Colonel, USAFR
Not really; think of it as holding his pay in an escrow account.
Here's another way to look at it. Suppose I worked for you and you have accused me of theft. And so I've been arrested and imprisoned.
Do you have an obligation to continue paying me while I'm in prison and awaiting trial? I think not.
The obligation you do have is to make things right if I'm found not guilty.